No sales calls · nothing personal collected unless you ask us to · no facility pays to be here
Text size
Contrast

Avir at Weatherford

521 W. 7th Street, Weatherford, TX 76086 · For profit - Corporation · 122 certified beds · (817) 594-8713 Medicare & Medicaid certified

Need help choosing, fast? Free, unbiased: Eldercare Locator 1-800-677-1116
Flagged for abuseBehavioral-health or dementia-care citation — no harm found (F0758)2 immediate-jeopardy citations CMS recorded as corrected before the inspection ended (past non-compliance)$22,356 in federal fines
Insights

This home has serious findings on its record. Read them closely before you consider it.

Worth asking about
  • CMS has flagged it for abuse
  • it has abuse, neglect, or exploitation citations (F0600, F0607) — most recent Jan 2026
  • it has a citation for its abuse-prevention policies, restraint use, or reporting and investigating of allegations (F0604) — cited below the harm level, meaning inspectors found the process wanting but did not find a resident harmed
  • inspectors recorded 2 serious findings as past non-compliance — the problem was found, fixed, and verified before the survey closed, so it is history rather than a current condition, but it is still worth asking what changed
  • a high number of inspection citations overall (16) — worth reading through, though larger and more-often-surveyed homes tend to accrue more lower-severity tags
  • the CMS record shows $22,356 in federal fines (most recent 2026-01-12)
  • its independent health-inspection rating is low (2/5)
  • its payroll-based staffing rating is low (2/5)
  • nursing-staff turnover (70%) runs well above the national median (45%)

One thing this read cannot see: what residents and families actually experience day to day. Public data misses the feel of a place — visit unannounced, ideally at a mealtime or on a weekend, talk to staff and families, and ask your tour questions.

A plain-English summary of the public record below — not a rating, ranking, or recommendation. We take no money from any facility.

2/5
CMS overall
2 of 5
Health inspectionSurveyor-assigned, ranked within your stateInspector-verified 2 of 5
StaffingFrom payroll records (PBJ) 2 of 5
Quality measuresSelf-reported by the facility 3 of 5

Location & what’s nearby

Hospital
★★ 2/5 CMS · Emergency dept. usually open 24/7 · ER 24/7
Urgent care / clinic
750 Eureka St · (817) 599-6222 · Call to confirm hours
Pharmacy
225 E Spring St · (817) 594-9816 · Call to confirm hours
Grocery
810 N Main St · (817) 594-5297 · Call to confirm hours
Park
1401 N Elm St · (817) 598-4124 · Typically dawn to dusk
Place of worship

Nearest of each type, straight-line distance. Hospitals come from the CMS Hospital General Information registry; everything else from Overture Maps (public data). Hospital and park hours are typical — call ahead to confirm.

Quality measures — how residents actually fare

Overall quality measures 3 of 5
Long-stay residentspeople who live here 3 of 5
Short-stay residentsrehab / post-hospital 3 of 5

Quality-measure stars summarize outcomes CMS tracks from the assessments each home submits — avoidable hospitalizations and ER visits, falls with injury, pressure ulcers, unplanned weight loss, and long-term antipsychotic use. Because the underlying data is self-reported, weigh a high score against the independent inspection record. Long-stay = permanent residents; short-stay = rehab and post-hospital stays.

Trend — is this home getting better or worse?

Over 2025-02 to 2026-06, this home’s CMS overall rating fell from 5 to 1 stars. From monthly CMS archive snapshots.

Horizontal axis runs 2025-02 to 2026-06. That is where CMS’s monthly archive ends, so the right-hand edge of each line is that month — not today.

Overall rating1★
Inspection scorelower = better
See all quality measures vs. state & national benchmarks
MeasureThis homeState avgTypical statevs typical state
Long-stay residents whose need for help with daily activities increased15.6%15.8%15.4%typical
Long-stay residents who lose too much weight2.9%3.0%5.4%better
Long-stay residents with a catheter left in their bladder0.0%0.3%0.9%better than state — see note marked double-dagger below the table
Long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection0.4%0.8%2.0%better than state — see note marked double-dagger below the table
Long-stay residents with depressive symptoms2.8%2.4%6.5%worse than state — see note marked double-dagger below the table
Long-stay residents who were physically restrained0.0%0.0%0.1%better than state — see note marked double-dagger below the table
Long-stay residents with falls causing major injury6.7%3.3%3.3%worse
Long-stay residents whose ability to walk worsened13.4%14.0%16.1%better
Long-stay residents on antianxiety or hypnotic medication21.5%18.0%18.9%worse
Long-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine96.1%98.0%95.3%typical
Long-stay residents with pressure ulcers4.8%3.8%4.7%typical
Long-stay residents with worsening bladder/bowel control6.0%13.4%21.2%better
Long-stay residents who got an antipsychotic medication — see the note below the table8.2%9.6%17.1%better
Short-stay residents who newly got an antipsychotic medication1.0%1.5%1.4%better
Short-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine100.0%88.0%79.4%better
Short-stay residents rehospitalized after admission29.2%25.7%22.6%worse
Short-stay residents with an outpatient ER visit11.2%12.3%12.0%typical
Long-stay hospitalizations per 1,000 resident days2.722.171.67worse
Long-stay outpatient ER visits per 1,000 resident days2.532.061.80worse

On this measure the state average is at least twice (or half) the typical state — a gap that size is usually how the state codes and reports the measure, not how its homes actually perform. Against a benchmark this state does not sit on, a “vs typical state” verdict would mostly be measuring the state, so we compare this home with its own state instead and show both averages.

§ Antipsychotics carry an FDA boxed warning — they raise the risk of death in older people with dementia-related psychosis, and are not approved for that use. So this measure is partly a read on whether a home sedates residents instead of staffing for them. But read a low rate carefully in both directions: CMS excludes residents coded with schizophrenia (and Tourette's or Huntington's) from this measure, and federal auditors have found implausible increases in schizophrenia coding since the measure was published — so a very low rate can reflect recoding rather than less prescribing. Ask the home what share of its residents carry a schizophrenia diagnosis, and how it handles behavioral symptoms without medication.

CMS quality measures, as Care Compare shows them. For most rows lower is better (fewer falls, ulcers, hospitalizations); vaccination rates are the exception. Not every row is risk-adjusted. CMS adjusts some measures for resident mix, but falls with major injury, antipsychotic use, physical restraints and the vaccination rates are unadjusted rates — so a home caring for heavier or more behaviorally complex residents can look worse on them without providing worse care. The “typical state” column is the median of the 50 state averages — not a national average of all homes. We use it because a plain average across homes is pulled badly off course by a few states’ reporting habits (long-stay depressive symptoms is the clearest case: Illinois codes it several times higher than most states, which alone lifted the all-homes figure to about twice what a typical state records). The median of state averages resists that — but it does weigh every state equally, so a large state counts no more than a small one, and it is a benchmark of our construction rather than a CMS-published figure. better/worse means the home differs from that benchmark by more than 10% of it; closer than that reads typical. CMS does not publish how many residents each measure covers, and the counts are often small — a single resident can move a rate by several points — so treat small gaps as noise. These come from data the facility reports, so weigh them against the independent inspection record above.

Short-stay rehab — if you are coming here from a hospital

Arriving from a hospital right now? Read the discharge guide → — your appeal rights, how to slow a rushed discharge, and what to ask about the numbers below.

45.7% of the Medicare patients who left this home got back to the community and stayed there for at least 31 days — which CMS reads as no different from the national rate. This is CMS’s risk-adjusted rate over 34 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.

45.7%U.S. median 51.5%
Got home and stayed home
11.6%U.S. median 10.7%
Went back to hospital
61.4%U.S. median 56.6%
Met the expected recovery
not reportedno hours filed
Therapy hours / resident / day

Met the expected recovery: 61.4% of this home’s Medicare short-stay residents left it at or above the ability to care for themselves and move around that CMS predicted for them, across 44 stays in Oct 2024–Sep 2025. The median of the 11,061 homes CMS publishes this for is 56.6%. Read it beside the getting-home figure, not instead of it: unlike the two measures above, CMS makes no better-or-worse call on this one and publishes no confidence interval for it, so this is a comparison and not a verdict — but it is the short-stay measure that separates homes most, and the one to ask about.

Therapy staffing: not reported. This home filed no therapist hours at all in its payroll data for this quarter. That is a gap in what it reported, and we do not read it as an absence of therapy — the homes that file nothing here include ones that discharged hundreds of Medicare rehab patients in the very same period, who plainly received therapy from someone. Because we cannot tell a home that under-reports from one that genuinely provides little, this home is left out of the comparison above rather than scored at zero. Ask it directly how many therapist hours a rehab resident gets, and on which days.

This section is about rehab stays, not living here. Most of this page — the stars, the quality measures, the inspection record — describes the home the way a permanent resident experiences it. These figures describe the short Medicare stay after a hospital discharge: a hip, a stroke, a bad infection, six weeks and home. They are different residents, different staff, often a different wing. Therapy hours are per resident in the building, not per rehab patient — the count includes every long-stay resident, and they mostly get no therapy at all. So a home with a small rehab wing inside a large nursing population reads low here even if its rehab patients get plenty of therapy, and a mostly-rehab home reads high. Use it to compare homes doing similar work, ask what a rehab resident actually gets in a day, and remember that CMS does not publish therapy minutes per patient — nobody does.

See every short-stay measure CMS publishes for this home
MeasureThis homeU.S. medianPeriod coveredCMS’s call
Got home and stayed homeRate of successful return to home or community from a SNF45.7%CMS range 33.0–64.051.5%Oct 2022–Sep 2024no different from U.S.
Went back to hospitalRate of potentially preventable hospital readmissions 30 days after discharge from a SNF11.6%CMS range 8.2–17.810.7%Oct 2022–Sep 2024no different from U.S.
Met the expected recoveryPercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to care for themselves and move around at discharge61.4%56.6%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Self-care at dischargePercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to care for themselves at discharge54.5%52.8%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Moving around at dischargePercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to move around at discharge52.3%50.0%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Medication problems followed upPercentage of residents whose medications were reviewed and who received follow-up care when medication issues were identified86.3%98.7%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Medication list to the next providerPercentage of residents where the SNF provided a current medication list to the next health care settingnot reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure.
Medication list to the familyPercentage of residents where the SNF provided a current medication list to the resident, family, and/or caregiver at final dischargenot reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure.
Falls with major injuryPercentage of SNF residents who experience one or more falls with major injury during their SNF stay2.0%0.0%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
New or worsened pressure ulcersPercentage of residents with pressure ulcers/pressure injuries that are new or worsened2.0%1.9%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Infections that led to hospitalPercentage of infections residents got during their SNF stay that resulted in hospitalization7.2%CMS range 3.9–11.37.1%Oct 2023–Sep 2024no different from U.S.
Medicare spending per stayMedicare Spending Per Beneficiary (MSPB) for residents in SNFs1.091.02Oct 2022–Sep 2024CMS makes no comparison for this measure

From the CMS Skilled Nursing Facility Quality Reporting Program — Medicare short-stay outcomes, which is a different dataset from the long-stay quality measures above and describes a different set of residents. Where CMS risk-adjusts a measure we show its adjusted rate, and the CMS range beside it is the confidence interval CMS publishes: a home whose range is wide is a home with few stays, where one patient moves the number several points. Read the period column. These measures do not share a window — the claims-based ones (getting home, readmission, spending) lag by a year or more, because a stay has to finish and its claims settle before it can be counted. CMS’s call is CMS’s, not ours: it is the only place anyone tests whether this home differs from the national rate at all, and most homes on most measures do not. Two caveats on it. CMS tests only three of these measures — getting home, readmission, and infections that led to hospital; on the other nine it publishes a rate and no comparison, and rather than compute a verdict CMS declined to make, we say so in the column. And on readmission almost every home in the country lands on “no different”, so that row separates homes far less than getting-home does — which is why met the expected recovery, a measure CMS does not test but which spreads across the whole range, is called out above the table rather than left in this list. The U.S. median column is our own, taken across every home CMS publishes that measure for in this same file; it is not a CMS-published benchmark. Homes CMS gives no rate for are left out of it rather than counted as zero. Medicare spending per stay is a ratio, not a percentage — 1.00 means this home’s Medicare spending for a stay matched the national figure CMS compares it against, and it measures cost to Medicare, not quality of care.

Staffing

0.44
RN hours/ resident / day
0.98
LPN hours/ resident / day
1.91
Aide hours/ resident / day
3.32
Total nurse hours/ resident / day
0.38
RN hoursweekends
70.4%
Total nursing turnover
75.0%
RN turnover

How full it usually is: this home is certified for 122 beds and averages 75.9 residents a day — about 62% occupied, or roughly 46 beds typically open. It often has substantial empty capacity — worth asking why, since low census can reflect either a new or shrinking home or one families are avoiding. This is a CMS average, not live availability — no public source publishes real-time vacancies, and a home can be full the day you call. Confirm with the home, and if you need a Medicaid bed specifically, ask about that separately: a home with open beds may still not have an open Medicaid bed.

Against a benchmark — not a legal minimum. In May 2024 CMS finalized the first federal staffing floor for nursing homes: 3.48 total nurse hours per resident per day, including 0.55 RN hours and 2.45 nurse-aide hours. Its hour requirements never took effect and are no longer on the books. Homes had until 2026 (2027 if rural) to comply, and that deadline never arrived: a federal court vacated the hour requirements in April 2025 (CMS has appealed), Congress then barred enforcement until 2034, and CMS formally repealed them by rule effective February 2026. This home is not required to meet these numbers, and is not violating anything by missing them. We still show the comparison because the figures are CMS’s own published estimate of adequate staffing, which makes them a useful yardstick — but they are our benchmark, not federal law: this home’s total nurse staffing of 3.32 hrs/resident/day is below the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.44 is below the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 1.91 is below the 2.45-hour aide benchmark. What federal law does require today is unchanged: “sufficient” nursing staff for residents’ needs and an RN on duty at least 8 consecutive hours a day, 7 days a week (42 CFR 483.35). Those are judged by inspectors on site, not by these averages, so read this comparison alongside the inspection record rather than as a pass/fail.

Weekend coverage: total nurse staffing is 2.92 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 3.49 on weekdays — 16% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 0.47 to 0.38 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)

This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 70% is well above the national median of 45%. 1 administrator has left in the past year.

Payroll-based (PBJ) staffing hours, as reported for Jan–Mar 2026 (CMS PBJ CY2026Q1) — the most recent quarter CMS has published, so they can lag a change of operator or staffing agency. Higher is generally better. Registered-nurse coverage and weekend staffing are the numbers families most often overlook — an RN on site matters most when something goes wrong, and coverage usually thins on weekends. High turnover means residents rarely see the same caregiver twice. One caveat: these are hours as reported, not adjusted for how sick or heavy-care this home’s residents are. CMS separately publishes a case-mix-adjusted view; we show the reported hours. A home caring for higher-acuity residents needs more hours to deliver the same care, so compare these figures against homes doing similar work, and read them next to the inspection record rather than alone.

Inspection trend

5
deficiencies at the latest standard inspection (2026-02-12)
6
at the previous standard inspection (2024-11-14)

Deficiencies are fewer than at the previous inspection — improving. Fewer citations over time suggests a home is fixing problems; a rising count is a warning sign — though two surveys are a short record, and survey teams differ. These counts are from the standard annual health survey only; the full citation list below may also include findings from complaint investigations, so the two won’t always add up.

Inspection deficiencies

State health-inspection citations, most serious first. Each carries an F-code (the federal rule it cites, e.g. F-684 = quality of care) and a letter A–L marking how serious and how widespread the problem was — we translate that grid into the plain tiers shown here. Wording is the official federal description.

ABCDEFGHIJKL

Each letter is a CMS scope-severity level; highlighted ones are where this home has citations. A–C = no harm found; D–F = potential for harm; G–I = actual harm; J–L = immediate jeopardy. Within each band the later letter is the more widespread finding (an isolated G is one resident; a widespread I is a pattern), so rightward and downward is worse.

16 citations, most serious first — scroll within the box to see all.

  • Immediate jeopardy · J2026-01-12 · tag F0600 — failed to protect residents from abuse and neglect — isolated
    Protect each resident from all types of abuse such as physical, mental, sexual abuse, physical punishment, and neglect by anybody.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure residents were free from abuse and neglect for one of seven (Resident #1) residents reviewed for abuse. On 10 /11/25 CNA A dragged Resident # 1 by her ankles approximately 40 feet down the hallway in the memory care unit when Resident # 1 refused to allow CNA A to perform incontinent care. The noncompliance was identified as PNC. The IJ began on 10/11/25 and ended on 10/16/25. The facility had corrected the noncompliance before the survey began. This failure could place residents at risk of serious physical injuries, fear and emotional trauma, decline in health and a decreased quality of life.Findings included:Record review of Resident #1's face sheet, dated 12/30/25, revealed she was a [AGE] year-old female admitted on [DATE]. She resided on the memory care unit and had the following diagnoses: vascular dementia (occurs when damaged blood vessels reduce oxygen and nutrient flow to the brain, impairing memory, thinking, and behavior…

    This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.

    Freedom from Abuse, Neglect, and Exploitation Deficiencies · Past Non-Compliance
  • Immediate jeopardy · J2026-01-12 · tag F0607 — failed to have anti-abuse policies — isolated
    Develop and implement policies and procedures to prevent abuse, neglect, and theft.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interviews and record reviews, the facility failed to implement written policies and procedures that prohibit and prevent abuse of residents for 1 (Resident #1) of 7 residents reviewed for resident abuse. The facility failed to implement their policy and procedures to ensure Resident #1 was free from abuse when the facility failed to protect Resident #1 from CNA A on 10/11/25, when CNA A grabbed Resident # 1 by the ankles and dragged her approximately 40 feet down the hallway on the floor of the memory care unit. The facility failed to ensure staff immediately reported suspicions of abuse to the Abuse Coordinator when staff members CNA B, CNA C, and LVN D witnessed the abuse and failed to report or intervene immediately. The facility failed to immediately suspend alleged perpetrators of abuse when the facility allowed the alleged perpetrator to work 8.35 hours on 10/11/25 after the incident occurred and 7.57 hours on 10/12/25, before she was suspended. The noncompliance was identified as PNC. The IJ…

    This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.

    Freedom from Abuse, Neglect, and Exploitation Deficiencies · Past Non-Compliance
  • Potential for harm · Ecited before2026-02-12 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — pattern
    Procure food from sources approved or considered satisfactory and store, prepare, distribute and serve food in accordance with professional standards.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to store, prepare, distribute and serve food in accordance with professional standards for food service safety in the facility kitchen reviewed for kitchen sanitation. The facility failed to ensure foods were properly stored, labeled, and dated in the refrigerator and freezer.The facility failed to ensure the floors in the pantry and back hallway were kept clean to avoid buildup of grease, dirt, and dust in the faculty's only pantryThe facility failed to keep the kitchen area maintained in a clean manner to keep the floors, food surfaces, and cooking areas free of debris.The facility failed to ensure the stove was maintained in a clean manner to avoid liquid from seeping from underneath, maintain the drip pans in a safe manner, and keep the back drop free of grease and food splatter.The facility failed to ensure kitchen staff used proper hand washing and sanitation procedures when handling and serving food. The facility failed to ensure kitchen staff did not touch food directly with their hands.The facility…

    This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.

    Nutrition and Dietary Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2026-02-12 · tag F0582 — isolated
    Give residents notice of Medicaid/Medicare coverage and potential liability for services not covered.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interview and record review the facility failed to inform each Medicaid-eligible resident, in writing, at the time of admission to the nursing facility and when the resident became eligible for Medicaid of the items and services that were included in nursing facility services under the State plan and for which the resident may not be charged, those other items and services that the facility offered and for which the resident may be charged, and the amount of charges for those services, and inform each Medicaid-eligible resident when changes were made to the items and services for 2 of 3 residents (Resident #6 and Resident #32) reviewed for resident rights. The facility failed to ensure Residents #6 and Resident #32 were given a paper copy of the NOMNC (notice of Medicare non coverage) with information on how to appeal the decision when residents were discharged from skilled services at the facility prior to covered days being exhausted.This failure could place residents at risk for not being aware of…

    This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.

    Resident Rights Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2026-02-12 · tag F0604 — failed to not use physical restraints improperly — isolated
    Ensure that each resident is free from the use of physical restraints, unless needed for medical treatment.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview and record review the facility failed to ensure residents had the right to be free from physical or chemical restraints imposed for purposes of discipline or convenience and not required to treat the resident's medical symptoms for 1 of 8 residents (Resident #3) reviewed for freedom from physical restraints. 1. The facility failed to obtain documentation and/or consent identifying the medical symptoms being treated and an order for a pommel cushion for Resident #3's pommel cushion.2. The facility failed to ensure Resident #3's movement was not restricted, due to a pommel cushion This failure could place residents at risk of unnecessary restriction of their freedom of movement (any change in place or position for the body or any part of the body that the person is physically able to control). Findings include: Record review of Resident #3's electronic face sheet, dated 02/12/2026, revealed a [AGE] year-old male who was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with a reentry admission on…

    This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.

    Freedom from Abuse, Neglect, and Exploitation Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2026-02-12 · tag F0690 — failed to manage incontinence, catheters, and urinary infections — isolated
    Provide appropriate care for residents who are continent or incontinent of bowel/bladder, appropriate catheter care, and appropriate care to prevent urinary tract infections.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview and record review the facility must ensure that a resident who is incontinent of bladder receives appropriate treatment and services to prevent urinary trach infections for 1 of 24 (Resident #8) residents reviewed for incontinent care. The facility failed to ensure CNA C performed proper peri-care (incontinent care) for Resident #8. This failure could place residents at risk of infections from incontinent care.Findings include: Record review of Resident #8's face sheet, dated 12/04/2025, revealed an [AGE] year-old female who was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Resident #8 had medical diagnoses which included fracture of the left femur, protein-calorie malnutrition, urinary tract infection, history of falling, anxiety disorder and schizoaffective disorder. Record review of Resident #8's Annual MDS, dated [DATE], revealed in Section C - C0500, a BIMS score of 05, which indicated the resident was severely cognitively impaired. Section H - Bladder and Bowel- revealed for toileting…

    This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.

    Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · Dcited before2026-02-12 · tag F0761 — failed to label and store drugs safely — isolated
    Ensure drugs and biologicals used in the facility are labeled in accordance with currently accepted professional principles; and all drugs and biologicals must be stored in locked compartments, separately locked, compartments for controlled drugs.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on observation, interview, and record review the facility failed to ensure in accordance with State and Federal laws, all drugs and biologicals were stored in locked compartments under proper temperature controls and permitted only authorized personnel to have access to the keys for 1 of 6 medication carts (cart #1) reviewed for medication storage.The facility failed to ensure medication cart #1 was locked and secured while unattended.This failure could place residents at risk of a drug diversion. Findings include:During an observation on 02/10/2026 at 10:55 AM, on south side of the facility, across from the nurses' station, revealed the overflow medication cart (Cart #1) was unlocked and unattended. One male resident in a wheelchair approximately four feet from Cart #1 was observed. The medication cart contained blister packs of blood pressure medications, anti-diabetic medications, diuretics, potassium supplements, anti-platelet medications and blood thinners.During an interview on 02/10/2026 at 11:00 AM, LVN B stated Cart #1 was new and only had overflow medications stored…

    This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.

    Pharmacy Service Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · F2024-11-14 · tag F0804 — failed to serve food at safe, palatable temperature — widespread
    Ensure food and drink is palatable, attractive, and at a safe and appetizing temperature.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure that each resident received food that was palatable, attractive, and at a safe and appetizing temperature for 1 of 1 lunch meal tested for nutritive value, flavor, and appearance: The facility failed to provide palatable food served at an appetizing temperature as evidenced by a sample tray tested on [DATE]. This failure could affect the residents who ate food from the facility's kitchen by placing them at risk of poor food intake and/or dissatisfaction of the meals served. The findings included: During an interview on 11/12/2024 at 10:16 AM, Resident #45 stated the food was not good and was cold. He stated the dietary offered a substitute, but it was not good. During an interview on 11/12/2024 at 10:49 AM, Resident #46 stated the facility had a new cook and nothing tasted good. He stated he was on a mechanical diet being ground up and nothing tasted right. During an observation on 11/12/2024 at 1:10 PM the test tray was on the…

    This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.

    Nutrition and Dietary Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · Fcited before2024-11-14 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — widespread
    Procure food from sources approved or considered satisfactory and store, prepare, distribute and serve food in accordance with professional standards.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on observation, interview, and record review the facility failed to store, prepare, distribute, and serve food in accordance with professional standards for food service safety for 1 of 1 kitchen reviewed, in that: The facility failed to ensure open items in the freezer, refrigerator, and dry food storage were dated and labeled and free from expired foods. The facility failed to ensure kitchen staff followed proper hand hygiene during meal preparations. These failures could place residents at risk for food borne illness and cross-contamination. Findings included: During an observation on 11/12/2024 at 9:46 AM of the pantry was; 1 gallon of blended oil, unable to read the received date with no opened date. 1 16 oz. opened clear zip lock bag of marshmallows with no opened date. 1 5 lb. opened bag of potato chips with no opened date. 1 26 oz. opened bag of Dried Classic Mashed Potatoes in a clear zip lock bag with no opened date. 1 8 lb. opened container of Creole Seasoning with no opened date. 1 opened bag of hamburger buns with no opened date. 1 20 oz. opened loaf of bread with…

    This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.

    Nutrition and Dietary Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · E2024-11-14 · tag F0758 — failed to limit and justify psychotropic drugs — pattern
    Implement gradual dose reductions(GDR) and non-pharmacological interventions, unless contraindicated, prior to initiating or instead of continuing psychotropic medication; and PRN orders for psychotropic medications are only used when the medication is necessary and PRN use is limited.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure residents' drug regimens were free from unnecessary drugs for 2 of 5 residents (Resident #'s 61 and 76) whose records were reviewed for psychotropic drugs, in that: 1. Resident #61 received an order for the antianxiety medication Valium PRN (as needed), and the order did not include an end date after 14 days. Valium was administered on 11/1/24, 11/2/24, 11/3/24, 11/4/24, 11/6/24, 11/8/24, 11/11/24, 11/12/24, 11/13/24, and 11/14/24 PRN. 2. Resident #76 had an order for the antipsychotic medication Seroquel was administered at bedtime11/1/24 thru 11/13/24 for a diagnosis of Unspecified dementia, unspecified severity, without behavioral disturbance, psychotic disturbance, mood disturbance and anxiety which was not an appropriate indication for use. This failure placed residents at risk for being over medicated or experiencing undesirable side effects and could cause a physical or psychosocial decline in health status. The findings included: Review…

    This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.

    Pharmacy Service Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · E2024-11-14 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — pattern
    Provide and implement an infection prevention and control program.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observations, interviews and record reviews, the facility failed to establish and maintain an infection control program designed to provide a safe, sanitary, and comfortable environment and to help prevent the development of communicable diseases and infections for 3 (Resident #'s 7, 33, and 61) of 4 residents reviewed for infection control , in that: Agency LVN failed to intervene and practice EBP (enhanced barrier precautions) to protect resident's from MDRO'S by not donning a gown when caring for and administering medications to Resident #7 on 11/12/24 via his gastrostomy (an opening into the stomach through the abdominal wall to provide medication and nourishment) tube. The facility failed to intervene and practice EBP when caring for Resident # 33 who had a pressure area on her coccyx. The facility failed to intervene and practice EBP when caring for Resident # 61 a who had a foley catheter . These failures could affect residents and place them at risk for cross contamination and infections. The…

    This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.

    Infection Control Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2024-11-14 · tag F0578 — failed to honor advance directives / code status — isolated
    Honor the resident's right to request, refuse, and/or discontinue treatment, to participate in or refuse to participate in experimental research, and to formulate an advance directive.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure residents have the right to formulate an advance directive for 1 of 24 residents (Resident #81) reviewed for advanced directives. The facility failed to have an Advanced Directive, Out of Hospital Do Not Resuscitate (OOHDNR) consent form which include a Representative and physician signature and License # in the electronic charting or admission paperwork for Resident #81. This failure could affect residents by not having their preferences honored concerning advanced directives. Finding included: Record review of Resident #81's electronic face sheet dated [DATE] revealed Resident #81 was an [AGE] year-old female, admitted on [DATE] with DNR status and a diagnosis of Traumatic subdural hemorrhage without loss of consciousness (a collection of blood that takes place due to bleeding creating an enhanced pressure on the brain). Record review of Resident #81's physician's orders dated [DATE] revealed an order for DNR. Resident #81 electronic health…

    This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.

    Resident Rights Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · Dcited before2024-11-14 · tag F0761 — failed to label and store drugs safely — isolated
    Ensure drugs and biologicals used in the facility are labeled in accordance with currently accepted professional principles; and all drugs and biologicals must be stored in locked compartments, separately locked, compartments for controlled drugs.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on observation, interview, and record review the facility failed to ensure that drugs and biologicals used in the facility were secured and stored in accordance with current accepted professional principles for 1 of 1 Treatment Cart observed for medication storage. The facility did not ensure the Treatment Cart was locked and secured on 11/13/24 on 300 hallway with resident present and no nurse present. This failure could place the residents at risk of gaining access to unlocked medications not prescribed to them. Findings included: Observation on 11/13/24 at 11:31 AM revealed the treatment cart was parked in the 300 hallway with a resident within 6 feet of the opened, unsecured cart. No nurse was in sight of the cart. Present in cart were medicated dressings, antiseptic ointment, triple antibiotic ointment, chlorhexidine gluconate solution antiseptic, Iodine swab sticks, adhesive remover, and wound cleanser. In an interview on 11/13/2024 at 11:37 AM the Treatment Nurse stated that she could not see treatment cart because she had walked 3 rooms down and into a resident room to…

    This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.

    Pharmacy Service Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · Fcited before2023-09-29 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — widespread
    Procure food from sources approved or considered satisfactory and store, prepare, distribute and serve food in accordance with professional standards.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on observation, interview, and record review the facility failed to store, prepare, distribute, and serve food in accordance with professional standards for food service safety in 1 of 1 kitchens reviewed. 1. The facility failed to ensure the floors weren't soiled with food particles and grease beneath the appliances and stainless-steel shelf units throughout the kitchen. 2. The facility failed to ensure two of two refrigerators did not have what appeared to be spilled milk, dried liquids, and food crumbs on the bottom shelf. These failures could place residents at risk for foodborne illness and a decline in health status. The findings include: Observations on 09/26/2023 at 9:40 AM, during the initial tour of the facility kitchen, revealed the following: - the floor was soiled with food debris and grease beneath shelves and appliances throughout the kitchen. - 2 of 2 refrigerators had what appeared to be spilled milk, dried liquids, and food crumbs on the bottom shelf. Observations on 09/26/2023 at 9:50 AM revealed daily cleaning logs, dated September 2023, used for all the…

    This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.

    Nutrition and Dietary Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · E2023-09-29 · tag F0921 — failed to keep a safe, functional, sanitary building — pattern
    Make sure that the nursing home area is safe, easy to use, clean and comfortable for residents, staff and the public.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview and record review the facility failed to ensure each resident had the right to a safe, clean, sanitary, comfortable, and homelike environment, including but not limited to receiving treatment and supports for daily living safely on one of six hallways (Hallway 200) and the smoking area for areas reviewed for environment. 1. The facility failed to ensure Hallway 200 did not have a strong odor of urine. 2. The facility failed to ensure the smoking area did not have a foul odor with a large, uncovered bin filled with dirty laundry and a large, uncovered bin filled with trash within the smoking area. These failures could place residents at risk for a diminished quality of life and a diminished clean, homelike environment. The findings include: 1. In an observation during the initial tour on 09/26/23 at 11:24 AM, the entire Hallway 200 had a strong odor of urine. In an observation on 09/27/23 at 9:30 AM, Hallway 200 had a strong odor of urine which became stronger towards the end of…

    This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.

    Environmental Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2023-09-29 · tag F0641 — isolated
    Ensure each resident receives an accurate assessment.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview and record review the facility failed to ensure assessments accurately reflected the resident's status for 1 of 6 residents (Resident #6) reviewed for accuracy of assessments. The facility failed to ensure Resident #6's MDS accurately reflected the resident hearing loss. This failure could place residents at risk for not receiving care and services to meet their physical needs and promote feelings of well-being and quality of life. The findings include: Record review of Resident #6's, undated, admission Record, revealed a [AGE] year-old male who was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Resident #6 had diagnoses which included: unspecified hearing loss unspecified ear, speech, and language development delay due to hearing loss, cerebral infarction (stroke), and hemiplegia non dominant side (paralysis on one side of the body). Record review of Resident #6's Annual MDS, dated [DATE], Section B revealed the resident was able to hear adequately. Record review of the resident's care plan…

    This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.

    Resident Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction

“Cited before” means this same F-tag appears on at least one other survey date in the record we hold — counting complaint investigations as well as standard surveys, with no time limit. It is our own read of the data, not CMS’s: CMS uses repeat deficiency as a formal term tied to consecutive standard surveys, and that is a narrower test than this one. A tag marked here may or may not meet it.

Worried about a resident here? There are three different people you can turn to, and they do different jobs:
  • Long-Term Care Ombudsman — a free, confidential advocate for the resident. They act only with the resident’s consent and work to resolve the problem. Find yours at theconsumervoice.org/get_help.
  • Adult Protective Services — the state agency that investigates suspected abuse, neglect, or exploitation of a vulnerable adult. Not sure of your state’s APS number? The federal Eldercare Locator will route you: 1-800-677-1116 or eldercare.acl.gov.
  • State survey agency — the regulator that licenses and inspects the home. Every state has an official nursing-home complaint line and most take complaints online; the Ombudsman or Eldercare Locator can connect you.
Not sure where to start, or need other help? Dial 2-1-1 for local resources — and if a call is hard or impossible for you, many local 211s also take a text (send your ZIP code to 898-211) or a web chat at 211.org; both vary by area, and 211.org will show what yours offers. Deaf or hard of hearing: dial 711 for the telecommunications relay service, then any number above. In an emergency, call 911.
It is illegal for a facility to retaliate against a resident or family for reporting a concern: federal law gives a resident the right to voice grievances — to the home or to any outside agency — without discrimination or reprisal (42 CFR §483.10(j)(1)). You may report anonymously.

Fines & penalties

$22,356 in federal fines across 2 penalties.

  • $8,281 — penalty dated 2026-01-12
  • $14,075 — penalty dated 2026-01-12

Dates are the dates CMS records the penalty, not the date of the conduct behind it. CMS publishes penalties on a rolling window, so this is what is currently on the public file — not the home’s lifetime history, and an older fine may attach to a problem that has since been corrected. The amounts are as imposed: the CMS file does not record whether a penalty was appealed, reduced, or paid, so we don’t say. Ask the home what each one was for and what changed since.

Part of a chain

This home belongs to AVIR HEALTH GROUP — 116 facilities. Here is how its ratings compare with the chain’s average across all its homes: See the whole chain — ratings, flags, fines and finances →

RatingThis homeChain avg
Overall 2 of 52.3-0.3 vs chain
Health inspection 2 of 52.4-0.4 vs chain
Staffing 2 of 51.8+0.2 vs chain
Quality measures 3 of 53.6-0.6 vs chain
The other 115 homes this chain runs (chain average 2.3★, per CMS)
1 of 5Avir At BanderaBandera, TX 1 of 5Avir At Cowhorn CreekTexarkana, TX 1 of 5Avir At DallasDallas, TX 1 of 5Avir At LindaleLindale, TX 1 of 5Avir At StephenvilleStephenville, TX 1 of 5Avir at AdamsTemple, TX 1 of 5Avir at Arbor TerraceSan Angelo, TX 1 of 5Avir at BeaumontBeaumont, TX 1 of 5Avir at BeltonBelton, TX 1 of 5Avir at BoerneBoerne, TX 1 of 5Avir at BradburnGrand Saline, TX 1 of 5Avir at CaldwellCaldwell, TX 1 of 5Avir at Camp WoodCamp Wood, TX 1 of 5Avir at Citizens TrailTexarkana, TX 1 of 5Avir at ConverseConverse, TX 1 of 5Avir at GainesvilleGainesville, TX 1 of 5Avir at GarlandGarland, TX 1 of 5Avir at GiddingsGiddings, TX 1 of 5Avir at Heritage OaksLubbock, TX 1 of 5Avir at HillsboroHillsboro, TX 1 of 5Avir at HoustonHouston, TX 1 of 5Avir at Johnson CityJohnson City, TX 1 of 5Avir at KennedaleKennedale, TX 1 of 5Avir at KerrvilleKerrville, TX 1 of 5Avir at LongviewLongview, TX 1 of 5Avir at LubbockLubbock, TX 1 of 5Avir at Meadow CreekSan Angelo, TX 1 of 5Avir at MineolaMineola, TX 1 of 5Avir at New BraunfelsNew Braunfels, TX 1 of 5Avir at PatriotEl Paso, TX 1 of 5Avir at PortlandPortland, TX 1 of 5Avir at Rose TrailTyler, TX 1 of 5Avir at San AngeloSan Angelo, TX 1 of 5Avir at SeguinSeguin, TX 1 of 5Avir at TexarkanaTexarkana, TX 1 of 5Avir at Tierra EsteEl Paso, TX 1 of 5Avir at Veterans MemorialHouston, TX 1 of 5Avir at WestonTemple, TX 1 of 5Avir at WinnsboroWinnsboro, TX 1 of 5Avir at WoodlandsEastland, TX

Showing 40 of 115; lowest-rated first.

A home rated well below its chain’s average can signal local problems; a chain with a low average across the board is a bigger pattern worth researching. CMS chain data under-reports private-equity and REIT ownership, so treat this as a floor, not the full picture.

Who owns this facility

Owner / managerTypeRoleShareSince
FANNIN COUNTY HOSPITAL AUTHORITYOrganization5% OR GREATER DIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST100%since 06/01/2022
SANDERSON, CLARKIndividualCORPORATE OFFICERsince 08/01/2025
521 W 7TH ST OPCO, LLCOrganizationOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROLsince 08/01/2025
FREUND, NOCHUMIndividualOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROLsince 08/01/2025
TRAVITSKY, AARONIndividualOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROLsince 08/01/2025
VILLEGAS, RACHELIndividualOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 08/01/2025
DAGAN, AMITAIIndividualINDIVIDUAL IS AN OWNER, PARTNER OR TRUSTEE OF ANY ADP OF THE SNFsince 11/03/2025
GOLDBERGER, ABRAHAMIndividualINDIVIDUAL IS AN OWNER, PARTNER OR TRUSTEE OF ANY ADP OF THE SNFsince 11/03/2025
GOLDBERGER, FAIGYIndividualINDIVIDUAL IS AN OWNER, PARTNER OR TRUSTEE OF ANY ADP OF THE SNFsince 11/03/2025
1008 CITIZENS TRAIL PROPERTY OWNER LLCOrganizationADP OF THE SNFsince 08/01/2025
WELLTOWER NNN GROUP, LLCOrganizationADP OF THE SNFsince 08/01/2025
WELLTOWER OP, LLCOrganizationADP OF THE SNFsince 08/01/2025
JOHNSON, PATSYIndividualADP OF THE SNFsince 08/01/2025

CMS files one row per role, so the 14 rows in the source record cover these 13 parties — each is shown once here with every role it holds. Nothing is omitted.

5 organizational owners listed — a facility can be part of a larger chain. CMS ownership data is known to under-report private-equity and REIT ties; treat as a starting point.

Follow the money — this home’s finances

Where a nursing home’s revenue comes from and where it goes — including money paid to companies under the same ownership. Most consumer sites never show this; we reproduce it straight from the Medicare cost report.

$6.9M
Net patient revenuemost recent cost report
+6.2%
Operating marginrevenue minus expenses
Who pays — share of resident-days
Medicaid 67%Medicare 8%Other / private 25%

Source: CMS Healthcare Provider Cost Reporting Information System (HCRIS), Medicare cost report Form CMS-2540 · fiscal year 2023. Facilities self-file these reports; figures are unaudited and a year or two behind. A home with no Medicare cost report on file shows no figures here.

Cost & finances

$230per resident / day
operating cost
$6,992per month
≈ monthly operating cost
$245per day
avg. revenue, all payers

Straight from this home’s Medicare cost report (CMS, FY2023). These are its operating economics — what it costs to run per resident-day and what it collects on average across Medicare, Medicaid, and private pay — not a private-pay quote. Your out-of-pocket cost depends on payer and room type, so ask the facility directly; a higher operating cost can reflect richer staffing or a sicker population. The cost-of-care planner shows regional benchmarks by care type.

What families pay in TX

Paying with Medicaid

This is a Medicare- and Medicaid-certified nursing home, so it can accept Medicaid for long-term care — like nearly all U.S. nursing homes. The private-pay figures below are what families without Medicaid pay; once a resident qualifies for Medicaid, out-of-pocket cost for covered nursing-home care is typically close to $0 (almost all of their income goes to the home as their share of the cost; they keep a small personal needs allowance — for clothing, haircuts, a phone — and Medicaid pays the rest). The amount of that allowance is set by each state. Confirm Medicaid-bed availability with the home, and see the Texas Medicaid page.

Typical monthly cost in Texas
$5,627/mo
Nursing home (semi-private)
$7,604/mo
Nursing home (private)
$5,666/mo
Assisted living

Median private-pay cost, CareScout (Genworth) 2025 Cost of Care Survey — a regional midpoint, not any single community’s rate. Private rooms and higher care levels cost more; ask for a current quote. Project your own in the cost-of-care planner.

Every figure above is reproduced from the CMS Provider Data Catalog (a public record), from the CMS extract processed 2026-08-01 — CMS provider number 455574. CMS refreshes its data monthly, and the star rating rests on the last standard inspection — dated 2026-02-12, which can lag current conditions. Staffing hours are CMS PBJ CY2026Q1 (Jan–Mar 2026). Check this record against the government’s own page for it: this home on Medicare Care Compare ↗ — the authoritative source, and the place to confirm anything here before you act on it. How we present it →

Not a government site. Eldercare Lens is not affiliated with, endorsed by, or authorized by the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS), Medicare, or any government agency. The star ratings, citations, and inspection wording on this page are reproduced from the public CMS record; the plain-English summaries, tiers, and comparisons around them are ours. We do not speak for CMS, and CMS has not reviewed this page. For the official record, go to Medicare Care Compare. How we’re funded →

Are you this operator? If the record here is out of date, or misses what you have since fixed, tell us and we will look: hello@eldercarelens.com. We reproduce the public CMS record and cannot change what it says — corrections to the underlying data go through CMS and your state survey agency — but we will correct anything we have got wrong about it, and we will say so on the page.

What to do next